Jockey Lester Piggott had his OBE removed when he was found guilty of tax evasion. Jimmy Carr was called "morally wrong" for avoiding tax by the Prime Minister. Yet Gary Barlow has neither lost his OBE or been condemned for knowingly avoiding tax on millions of pounds of earnings. The PM says Barlow does a lot of good work for Children in Need - well it's a good job he does, since there are more children in need because of tax avoiders like him than ever before.

So regardless of whether he's a good bloke or not, we cannot set an example that tax avoidance has no penalty at all. Gary Barlow and his kind should not be honored by a society he refuses to fund fairly. Let's get rid of Barlow's OBE. Come on, vote! It only takes a minute!

Jockey Lester Piggott had his OBE removed when he was found guilty of tax evasion. Jimmy Carr was called "morally wrong" for avoiding tax by the Prime Minister. Yet Gary Barlow has neither lost his OBE or been condemned for knowingly avoiding tax on millions of pounds of earnings. The PM says Barlow does a lot of good work for Children in Need - well it's a good job he does, since there are more children in need because of tax avoiders like him than ever before.

I think we should be urging the BBC to give David Lowe his old job back as a DJ within the BBC after he felt forced to resign due to accidentally playing an 82 year old song with a racial slur in it.
The DJ has apologized for the genuine accident, and should be forgiven.

For average hardworking people to write to their GP and advise them to inform the BMA to vote NO regarding the new charging service as their patients would no longer be able to afford visits to their GP. That the NHS should remain a free service and that by voting no we are protecting the vulnerable in our society, the young children, the elderly and those unable to cope who require constant support.
So write to your GP today and tell them to vote no to the BMA by the 22nd may 2014 and keep the NHS services free.

Momentum building from within care sector, for dementia conditions to be re-classified. Currently, dementia care funding is determined by a complex assessment process. If re-classified as a medical condition, similar to strokes/ other cardio-vascular , it would be covered as a medical issue and fully-funded. Probably one of the most explosive current issues in NHS care for this decade.

On 22nd May in York GPs will vote on whether to propose charging for GP visits. If they decide to do so this would set in motion the end of the NHS set up in 1948 'free at the point of use' and would ensure that poorer people will be unfairly disadvantaged. The majority of the population is against this and the only people who will gain are private healthcare companies who will suddenly be in demand, and their shareholders (including many MPs in the present government who are 'coincidentally' starving the NHS of funds). The proposal is for people to write to their GPs asking them to vote against charging as being fundamentally unfair and socially destructive.

On 22nd May in York GPs will vote on whether to propose charging for GP visits. If they decide to do so this would set in motion the end of the NHS set up in 1948 'free at the point of use' and would ensure that poorer people will be unfairly disadvantaged. The majority of the population is against this and the only people who will gain are private healthcare companies who will suddenly be in demand, and their shareholders (including many MPs in the present government who are 'coincidentally' starving the NHS of funds). The proposal is for people…

Retract plans to close The Pilgrims Hospice, Canterbury in 2016 and allow it to remain in its current working state.
Following the disclosure yesterday that Steve Auty wants to close the Pilgrims Hospice in Canterbury in 2016, this petition already has 5,200 signatures. We need more people to be informed about this through 38 degrees. This Hospice was built by local people for local people and is a fantastic example of all that can be achieved for everyone that needs the wonderful services it provides. A recent BBC programme Inside Out focused on the Pilgrims Hospice to show how much care, love and understanding, besides the clinical excellence is given by all the staff and volunteers who work there.It also made it apparent that far from needing less services in the future, more Hospice places will be needed. I for one will do all that I can to stop this happening and ask for your support and signatures
to help in this campaign.

Petition started by Sarah Kelly,Teynham, United Kingdom

Petitioning FAO Steve Auty

Retract plans to close The Pilgrims Hospice, Canterbury in 2016 and allow it to remain in its current working state.
Following the disclosure yesterday that Steve Auty wants to close the Pilgrims Hospice in Canterbury in 2016, this petition already has 5,200 signatures. We need more people to be informed about this through 38 degrees. This Hospice was built by local people for local people and is a fantastic example of all that can be achieved for everyone that needs the wonderful services it provides. A recent BBC programme…

We are currently often completely unaware if the meat we are eating is Halal food or not. "Halal" means permissible in accordance with Islamic law must be performed by a Muslim, who must precede the slaughter by invoking the name of Allah, most commonly by saying "Bismillah" ("In the name of God") and then three times "Allahu akbar" (God is the greatest). Then, the animal must be slaughtered with a sharp knife by cutting the throat etc. Often the animal is not stunned which leads to unnecessary suffering. Clear labelling needs to put in place so we can act with our conscience.

We are currently often completely unaware if the meat we are eating is Halal food or not. "Halal" means permissible in accordance with Islamic law must be performed by a Muslim, who must precede the slaughter by invoking the name of Allah, most commonly by saying "Bismillah" ("In the name of God") and then three times "Allahu akbar" (God is the greatest). Then, the animal must be slaughtered with a sharp knife by cutting the throat etc. Often the animal is not stunned which leads to unnecessary suffering. Clear labelling needs to put in place so we can act with…

My families experience has been a battle to keep my Mother (who has severe dementia and lives at home) living in her own home until the end of her life. The issue is around keeping her safe and stopping her wandering. The local authority say she should be in a residential home: where she will be locked in, under continuous supervision and control and medicated to keep her quiet. But we are not allowed to lock her front door.

The big banks have decided they need to replenish their coffers and
they've targeted the not so well off yet again.
Instead of paying a small amount of interest each month you will now be charged a fixed fee of 0.75p a day for up to £500.00 ... £1.50 a day
£500.00 to £1000.00 £2.00 a day £1000'00 to £2000.00.. . £3.00 a
day £2000.00 to £3000.00 May i also add the RBS have already started and Barclays start on the 16th of June

I have just left an excellent public meeting at which this Bill was debated. There were various powerful arguments in favour of the Bill, including:

several powerful testimonies of personal experiences, mainly with long-suffering parents who wanted to end their life.
the Bill is not shortening life, it is shortening death!
the Bill is very narrow in its scope in order not to put people off.
the Bill is based on 16 years positive experience of similar legislation in Oregon
It is a citizen's right to choose when to die, and not parliamentarians, or medics.

using this methord companies will call several numbers at the same time,several times a day.only the first responder will get to talk to someone. everyone else will find the experience frustrating and time wasting.For the elderly& single this can be very disturbing.Isuggest this should be made illegal

IF MEPs: Their "Parties"; party workers, activists & supporters dedicated themselves to tackle homelessness in their EU constituencies. Homelessness could be abolished throughout the European Union and many lives could be saved

The bedroom tax is affecting more and more people as they fall into rent arrears or are forced to move. It is inhuman in its inflexible application. One example: a family with 3 children under ten, the youngest of whom is blind and needs his own room have been told they only qualify for 2 bedrooms. It is the bankers and the better off who should be helping fix the deficit, not the poorest.

The neighbourhood needs to become conscious of itself as a community - it decides on its boundaries and its size (200?) and aims at buying a communal house to use as a focus - it creates a permanent and continuous process practicing political, social, economic, environmental etc activities. It can enhance the individual or household life and engage with the organisations of the locality.

Sub Post Office closures following Privatisation.The sub P.O at Upper Beeding W Sussex is threatened with closure because it is not part of a larger vending operation.The new R.M .does not want sub P.M,s to be financially dependent on them.Our village PO plays a critical role in U.Beeding & Bramber & MUST NOT CLOSE.

I did want to notify you of two serious proposed attacks on civil liberties being put forward by the government via HMRC.
These are that they propose to give HMRC the power to dip into an individual’s bank account without any court supervision and the second is to assume that a person is guilty , under certain circumstances until proved innocent.
These seem to me very serious attacks on citizens which should be resisted.
I attach an article which explains in more detail.
What do you think?
Roger Collinge

Attached article- not written by me

My subject is two proposed new powers for HMRC. Neither is contained in the 2014 Finance Bill but both are scheduled for the 2015 Finance Bill. There is, therefore, still time to do something about them.

The first power

The first proposed power would enable HMRC to collect tax debts direct from people’s bank accounts where the debt is established and where HMRC has taken steps to recover it but the taxpayer has still failed to pay. Some 53 pages into the Budget Red Book those of us who spend our time reading the small print in such documents found the following statement:

“The government will modernise and strengthen HMRC’s debt collection powers to recover financial assets from the bank accounts of debtors who owe over £1,000 of tax or tax credit debts, have the financial means to pay, and have been contacted multiple times by HMRC to pay. A minimum of £5,000 will be left across debtors’ accounts. This brings the UK in line with many other tax authorities which already have the power to recover debts directly from an individual’s account, such as France and the US.”

This rang some pretty loud warning bells for me, not because I don’t want HMRC to collect tax that is due, but because I fear the potential for serious errors or mistakes.

A couple of years ago I received a letter at home threatening a visit to mark my goods for auction as I had ignored correspondence about a tax debt. I did not actually have a tax debt ( the fact that no figure for tax was shown on the threatening letter was something that might have given the person who sent the letter pause for thought but clearly didn’t). Fortunately I knew what to do next because of the job I do, but what if I hadn’t?

The week after the Budget announcement was made one of my clients was threatened with a visit to collect a PAYE debt that had been paid weeks earlier and another client was called (he said the tone of the call was pretty stern) about a VAT debt that had also been paid. Both clients have an excellent history of paying their tax on time.

This week a client received a “most people pay their taxes on time so why haven’t you?” letter requesting payment of tax shown as due on an HMRC self-assessment amendment. The amendment was dated 10 April and the chasing letter was dated 16 April.

All of these were administrative errors. All had explanations. All caused irritation, wasted time and unnecessary worry. I suspect most practitioners reading this will have had similar experiences.

And that is why I am worried about the proposed new power. I think HMRC should be as well, because it will only take one or two cases of this going wrong to create some very bad headlines.

The measure is up for consultation and the best outcome would be for it to be dropped. No-one should have access to a citizen’s bank account without the sanction or oversight of the court.

The second power

The second proposal is for there to be a presumption that someone who has undeclared taxable offshore income has failed to declare it deliberately. They should therefore be presumed guilty unless and until proved innocent. I do not defend deliberate failure to disclose offshore taxable income: those who deliberately fail to declare taxable income should be dealt with robustly. Tax evasion is a crime. This reversal of the usual presumption of innocence however is an extremely alarming proposal.

I am concerned that a fundamental principle of law is being turned on its head. I am also concerned about the potential for perfectly innocent situations to lead to utterly ghastly consequences.

Again this measure will be consulted on and again I hope that it will be re-thought.

The role of Parliament

There is then a further stage in the process. Legislation has to be drafted and to find its way into a Finance Bill in 2015 (I say “a” Finance Bill as 2015 being an election year there will be more than one). That means there must be debate about the proposed powers in Parliament. I hope that there will be because what we are talking about here is the balance between the powers of the state and the rights of the citizen. It is about civil liberties. These are things I would hope MPs would be keen to debate.
I worry about this on two counts.

The first is that on reading the first day’s Finance Bill Committee proceedings this week my overriding impression was that there was far too much focus on making party political points about the economy and the tax system and far too little focus on the technical detail. The technical detail of the proposed new HMRC powers will need careful, informed scrutiny and robust debate by our elected representatives.

The second is that these proposals need to be seen for what they are: new powers which – if they are to be introduced at all - must be balanced by very strong safeguards. Those safeguards must be in law, not in guidance. It would be too easy for politicians to take a superficial view that as the powers are aimed at those who do not keep their tax affairs in order HMRC must be granted them.

The debate needs to be about the core issue: the power of the state and the rights of the citizen. It will take place in 2015, the 800th anniversary of the signing of Magna Carta. Hopefully that will focus minds on the importance of taking only necessary powers and of respecting the rights of the citizen.

I did want to notify you of two serious proposed attacks on civil liberties being put forward by the government via HMRC.
These are that they propose to give HMRC the power to dip into an individual’s bank account without any court supervision and the second is to assume that a person is guilty , under certain circumstances until proved innocent.
These seem to me very serious attacks on citizens which should be resisted.
I attach an article which explains in more detail.
What do you think?
Roger Collinge